Lassies of Fraser's Ridge - Outlander Season 4, there's spoilers in them thar hills.

[Lessstressedhemum]

A new adventure awaits us in the New World. It's going to be savage!

And actually I messed it up there. The asterisks aren’t meant to be visible in the final text. @coblett36 Son’t know why it did that above.

I never thought of that, Cobbet, of course she did! She probably fancied a swatch at the farm Park, as well. She's likely never seen a llama and would need to find out a wee bit about goats as well.

Is there to be a new episode on Monday or are we on a festive break?

Any time I try and complain about a plotline in Outlander DH mutters something about time travel and stones You've just got to go with it.

It also seems like a very Scottish thing that you do meet someone that knows your granny wherever you end up in the world.

I suspect , like many here, I TOTALLY accept the basic premise of Claire falling through the stone to start off with. But after that, I am vehemently against any other Woo, so M. Raymond and his glowy necklace and psychic healing made me go WTF.

Poor Brianna😢

Roger and Bree really burnt my biscuits in this episode. They both need to grow up!

Poor Brianna .

I suppose Brianna is supposed to have that Fraser stubbornness, but she and Roger need their heads banging together. I thought the sex scene with them was done sensitively, whereas in the books it just felt all wrong to be reading about Jamie and Claire's daughter having sex, somehow. I liked that we didn't "see" the rape, I'm voting for taking a taser to the 1770s.

I think the Woo stuff is an interesting question. I read quite a bit of fantasy, which has these elements in and I think it works when it's consistent within the bounds of the fiction iyswim. So, the falling through the stones, is acceptable to the story and part of the suspension of disbelief, but I think you either need to "explain" magic in stories or allow it to have an air of mystery and be unexplained. I think DG can't quite decide and has the initial falling through the stones, but then tries to add explanations after that don't somehow seem to fit the original premise. Also, sometimes it's just stretching it a bit far.

DG does not to magic well. I've been reading fantasy for forty years, the vast majority of it magical in one way or another. Your "world" needs to have a clearly delineated magic system like the One Power in WoT or the metal eating stuff in Mistborn for it to work properly and not be jarring.

The trouble with DG is that she doesn't have a system or even any consistent magic, just the odd bit of spooky woo to show how special and "sensitive" Claire is and to try to forge a link between time travellers. It's like an ill thought through add on.

I am so glad that we didn't see the rape. I thought that they handled it well and I thought the sex scene was much less uncomfortable than in the book. It was nice how they echoed Jamie and Claire's wedding night and first night back together. Nice but a bit creepy

It was good to see Murtagh meet Fergus as well. Is Jamie going to have been instrumental in turning Washington against the British? Oh, and Claire strikes another blow for womankind against the prejudices of the day! She is probably single handedly responsible for female emancipation.

Lessstressed, Mistborn is a good example, I'm not familiar with Wheel of Time. The magic has clearly delineated "rules" which are revealed as the books progress, not added on retroactively. I think that's why the original premise of falling through the stones works, lots of fantasy books have a portal to another time/dimension, it's not an unfamiliar trope. But Claire is vehemently scientific and rational, arguing against the Faery and witchcraft superstitions, why would she accept Maitre Raymond's colour changing necklace or psychic healing without an underlying explanation?

Lol at Claire being responsible for women's emancipation. I think a lot of the ideas in Outlander are good, but they sometimes lack subtlety and finesse.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who found the Brianna and Roger sex scenes in the book uncomfortable reading. I think the focus on the intimate level of her parents' relationship made reading about their daughter's sex life a bit weird. Will Brianna meet up with Jamie in Wilmington at the same Inn, do we think? It all happens in Wilmington. Talking of which, surely Stephen Bonnet is wanted there as he escaped hanging...

I had to fast forward the Roger and Bree sex scenes. I did not need to see that. Lucky they found that unattended barn with all the rugs and the fireplace, wasn't it? Unfortunately I stopped ff'ing when I thought they'd finished and still caught the unfortunate blow job The juxtaposition of Roger's lurvemaking and Bonnet's rape was well done.

I am starting to enjoy the way they've taken bits from the book and taken all sorts of liberties to make them better. And going from the theatre to Claire's theatre was nicely done.

I’m just pleased we were spared all the ‘Leroi’ talk

Lucky me! DH has gifted well!

Very nice.
Merry Christmas lassies.

Well finally got an hours p & q to watch this weeks episode. Not my fave. I though they ironed out the plot pretty well and Sophie Skelton's post rape acting was good, but I just don't get the chemistry in the Roger / Brianna sex scenes. Compared to the Jamie/Claire first night it was feeble. In the books it's a bit rubbish, but I don't think the actors have anywhere near the chemistry of Sam and Catriona. Also it was another episode where Sam had very little to do which is always a shame! However, hopefully next week Jamie and Brianna will meet and we'll be back to jolly old Fraser's Ridge with Jamie and Ian knocking seven bells out of the long suffering Roger.

My favourite moments were Claire being awestruck at seeing/meeting Washington, and the scenes at Fergus &Marsali’s house. Also enjoyed Jamie creating the diversion, for Claire to step up and do her bit.

I found the sex scenes uncomfortable viewing and finding Roger much less attractive in every way that in the books - just disappointingly more and more unlikeable (although Richard Rankin I do like). I think Sophie is doing a great job this season and the rape was handled well in the show.

The need to bring Ian back in or no one is even going to miss him at the end of the season.

Hoping they do a good job with the reunion next week

I don't find book Roger attractive or likeable at all, although I do feel really sorry for him. I don't feel any chemistry between he and Brianna in the books, so I wasn't expecting to in the show and I haven't been disappointed. They just really, really burst me with all the whining and petty bickering. And Brianna grinds my gears more than Claire does. I do think show Brianna and Roger are more feeble than the book characters, if that is even possible!

I hope we see more of Sam next week, I am missing the j and C stuff immensely.

I just watched ep. 8. Roger is such a knob and Brianna is ridiculous. If I was marooned 200 years in the past I sure as hell wouldn't be kicking the only person I know back to the future! I'm not enjoying this series as much as others but I persevere partly so I can claim some time on the telly away from bloody fortnite. It scatters the males in the house and gives me peace and quiet

How awful is it that I forgot to watch this weeks episode? I love it, but s4 is not doing it. How has Roger gone from a sweetheart to an absolute tit?? So we won't mind when Jamie kicks the shit out of him and sells him to the Indians?

I'm off back to s1 for some escapism...

Roger is SO not rocking the 18th century pioneer long greasy hair look.
Did he shave off his beard for a reason? Lice?

Roger was always a twally in the books. He does my head in. He's another character that DG doesn't really develop as well as she could. He seems to be a bit of a device for focusing bad things on but other than that he is just wet and a bit of big jesse.

Do you think Roger's beard is essential for him to be a decent bloke, as now he's shaved it off, he's become a bit of a jerk?

I think they could have done a better job of showing why Roger insisted on going for the gems. He thinks it’s the only chance to get them back safely rather than just being an arse.

Did they even say that that was what he was doing? I took it that they were both just storming off. The gem talk was very brief.

I think roger briefly said I know where some gems are. If I hadn’t had been a book reader I don’t think I would have noticed.

Hello all, I'm new to this thread, just caught up with Outlander this summer. My main issue with it at the moment is Roger, I found him lovely right up until that fight at the clan gathering, and since then he's been so controlling and weird (with a brief return to form on the ship). I was really rooting for him and Brianna but not now, and I don't think that's what the show intends. I like Rik Rankin so guess it's the writing? Anyway, still really looking forward to the big meeting next week.